Author
Topic: Accusations of twisting the Scriptures and taking things out of Context (Read 2967 times)

The Orthodox Christians love to use that justification to refute the countless texts referring to Universal Salvation. But honestly, I dont understand how much clearer than "In adam all die, in Christ all made alive, each man to his own order". Yet even before I knew about Universal Salvation, and studying the bible, I was not convinced that the scriptures ever taught a place of Endless Torment. When I thought of Fire and Worms, I was thinking of total annihilation. Fires are incapable of torturing something forever. You put a person in a fire, they are going to burn up and not exist. Worms are known for feeding on dead flesh. I at one time believed in annihilation. Yet the Hellfire believers have found a way of twisting the scriptures to match their fantasies of unending burning and constant worms feeding on you.

There are others who insist the Parable of Lazarus is literal. Yet another way to "prove" that Jesus spoke of unending punishment.

Paul Hazelwood

Well, when it comes right down to it, you can cause the bible to say a lot of things when placed into a certain context.

If a person believes that Gods judgment is punishment, then ET is not actually out of context when intepreting the scriptures.

If a person believes that Gods judgment is corrective, then UR is not actually out of context.

Any one can accuse another that they have taken a scripture out of context, fact is no one can actually prove what context is true.

I have faith that the context of Love shows that the character of God will not allow any one to remain lost endlessly, I can provide an intepretation of scripture that context provides and study to remain in that context. I personally cannot rightly "prove" it, but it is the story I am sticking to till God makes me believe otherwise. :)

I was raised in the traditional church all my life as well, but I swallowed the entire message and was even a bit critical toward others who were more . . .liberal (shudder) . . . than we were. To take the ET road is to be much more of a disciplinarian. God loves you, but you need to be beated until your spirit is broken, then life will be grand.

We're sad that our loved ones died and went to hell. But that's what you get when you disobey God. He's the Dad and Dad rules. If you don't like it, take it up with Dad . . . I just never thought, ever, that this way of looking at God could be wrong.

I remember in later years, I had a life-changing experience with God in the mid-nineties and went through the school of ministry, on fire and hungry for more, at which point, they allowed me to become an adult teacher. After a couple years, I found myself teaching the book of Revelation and I remember being very cynical toward the idea that there were actually people out there who were not pretrib. Even though it was SO PLAINLY WRITTEN that the church was OBVIOUSLY going to leave before all hell broke loose.

I think there may be more of a combination of twisting and being twisted. If my perspective is twisted, it's not that I'm trying to twist all Scripture, it's that when I read all Scripture, I'm actually seeing it in a twisted manner, but I don't realize it's twisted. So it's not that I'm twisting all of it on purpose.

At the same time, when you come across those passages that "appear" to say something else, in order for you to retain your whole belief on the subject, you find a way to twist things a bit so that everything else remains intact. But it all starts with the original twisted perspective in the first place.

I believe what we're going to see happening more and more is, God is realigning the twistedness in us so that we all come into his alignment and as we do, more and more revelation of the nature of the Son will be revealed to us as well.

I was blessed when I first became a Christian because I found a booklet that taught universal salvation and so when I read the bible, to me there was no concept of eternal hell torture, sometimes I thought maybe annihilation is the most biblical, for it takes the middle ground between ET and UN, but yet the Annihilation theory sometimes falls short when compared to the UN scriptures, but the UN idea still had/has a big problem for me and that is the exact window of where/when will god give another chance to the unbeliever. I am still working on this but I believe I am on too something as God showed me something incredible last night

I know one day God is going to hold me responsible for all the evil I've done.

BUT

if I get the chance I'm going to ask Him a question too.

I happen to know a lot of people have come to UR in their deepest moments of despair. Some were seriously on brink of suicide. If UR is deception then why did God allow Satan to sell these people a big lie just when they were in their darkest hour?

The main scripture, upon which they base their false doctrine, is the one found in Colossians 1:20: "And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven." They declare that all things in this verse includes those that have gone to hell and they will all be reconciled back to God; however, if we look at the verses in the proper context, we can see that the "all things" mentioned here are "all things in Christ." Obviously, those outside of Christ, who have rejected Him, are not included in the word "all" in this verse. Notice that the verse says, "things in earth and in heaven," not things in hell, that God will reconcile.

So only worms and birds are saved?The verse doesn't state on the surface of the earth either. Besides then fact that their hell doesn't exist they usually say hell is in the earth.

The remaining part of the article is just circular reasoningFor example for ever/age during. The author makes an assumption and that uses verses based on that assumption to prove the assumption.

Quote

Circular reasoning is a formal logical fallacy in which the proposition to be proved is assumed implicitly or explicitly in one of the premises. For example:

"Only an untrustworthy person would run for office. The fact that politicians are untrustworthy is proof of this."

Such an argument is fallacious, because it relies upon its own proposition — "politicians are untrustworthy" — in order to support its central premise. Essentially, the argument assumes that its central point is already proven, and uses this in support of itself.

Circular reasoning is different from the informal logical fallacy begging the question, as it is fallacious due to a flawed logical structure and not the individual falsity of an unstated hidden co-premise as begging the question is.

Then the author wants to forcefully prove UR is wrong by: "Disregard the words of Jesus Himself, as He speaks numerous times about an eternal hell in the New Testament."That's an assumption Jesus speaks of a ??? hell.What the ??? actually is, is part of the debate so it can't be used as proof.In fact his defenition of hell is a assumption too.

Logged

1 Timothy 2:3-4 ...God our Savior; Who will have all men to be saved...John 12:47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

It's already discussed on this forum. I'm sure a crew member is able to locate it

Aleax, you may also like to read this site.And especially (another ET word ) the "UR refuted?" section.A few examples of ET attempts to debunk UR being burned like chaff....

« Last Edit: June 18, 2010, 09:00:53 PM by WhiteWings »

Logged

1 Timothy 2:3-4 ...God our Savior; Who will have all men to be saved...John 12:47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

Paul Hazelwood

Philippians 2:10-11:10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Quote

Their false reasoning is that they try to interpret the word "bow" to mean "worship" when the Greek word used here "kampto," simply means to "bend" or "bow." They say those in hell (under the earth) will "worship" God, after they have been set free from hell. This verse simply means that those in hell, all demons and the devil himself, will bend and yield to the will of God. The Bible tells us that devils tremble and believe, so they certainly will bow at the presence of God. James 2:19: "Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble."

Read here very carefully because this kind of attempt at a refutation happens all the time.

The writer certainly includes two verses that support Christian Universalism but notice an omission in the writers explanation.

The writer attempts to refute through the assertion of mistranslation of the Ancient greek word Kampto and has a reasonable point, but as with most others, they leave out the context of the nature of that " TO BEND" and what it means when someone "CONFESSES JESUS AS LORD" "TO THE GLORY OF GOD THE FATHER".

The account of demons that the writer refers to are never depicted as confessing "JESUS AS LORD" "TO THE GLORY OF GOD THE FATHER".

Many people ignore that part of the passage and just say "Well the demons bow" well sure, but that is not all there is being told in the passage.

I was blessed when I first became a Christian because I found a booklet that taught universal salvation and so when I read the bible, to me there was no concept of eternal hell torture, sometimes I thought maybe annihilation is the most biblical, for it takes the middle ground between ET and UN, but yet the Annihilation theory sometimes falls short when compared to the UN scriptures, but the UN idea still had/has a big problem for me and that is the exact window of where/when will god give another chance to the unbeliever. I am still working on this but I believe I am on too something as God showed me something incredible last night

The church has ingrained in us that salvation can only come while you're alive and breathing. Because you have to be conscious in order to say the magic words to invite him in. But for me, the issue isn't about saying the magic words. If I "beleive" in my heart, my conversation will reflect that. That's all that's saying to me. The transformation doesn't come because I confessed. It came because I believed. I now, don't confess in order to be saved. I confess because I already "am" saved.

Now, for those who don't experience that inward transformation, their destination still remains the same. That's the other misnomer about salvation. It's not about avoiding hell and it's not about going to heaven.

John 3:3Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

No mention about heaven or hell, but it's about having the ability to "see" the kingdom of God. Which by the way does not come by way of flesh and blood . . .it's a realm of the spirit. The kingdom of God is not heaven as the church preaches about heaven. To me the kingdom is the principles of which the spirit realm operates in. They don't come through knowledge, but through revelation, which only comes through relationship . . .which only happens through salvation.

So . . .if a person dies and didn't experience salvation on earth . . .I believe the cross already had him in a purified state, he just didn't experience it due to not allowing the transformation to happen in this natural realm while he was breathing. But once his spirit leaves his body, it's no longer bound by natural law, now it is governed by the law of the Spirit . . .which manifest and is governed by the power of the cross.

Forgive the sinners. Stop holding them to their actions. Let the cross take care of them. Same with my "self". Why would one choose to hang on to a belief that judgment is still coming to ones actions if one has already experienced the cross? I chanllenge you to go a step further . . .why would you hold your friends in bondage of their actions if they died without knowing Christ?

Is it the nature of God who has spoken this? Or is it the perspective from which you read Scriptures that caused you to base your belief on this? How powerful is the cross to you? Can it not save the world? If it can, then why are we still expecting judgment to come to actions that the cross already accounted for???

Hello Nathan I understnad what you are saying, the idea that upon the cross everything was completed and finished in spirit and needs to be worked out in the natural.

I partially agree with this, yes the penalty of our sins have been paid for and even death itself cannot defeat what Christ did on Calvary, but I also believe in free will. You seem to think that salvation to all men means that all will be saved, but notice that Christ, even love does not force anything. Christ says I come at the door and knock, the person must answer the door, or Christ remains on the outside.

Also in order to defeat sin one must yield to Christ, now I think that most men will bow to Christ, but I also think that many people, even as the number of the sand as the seashore, will reject love and reject Christ.This is spoken of in Revelation, where armies from Gog and magog will surround Jerusalem and attack the holy city. Also in Revelation and spoken throughout the gospels, no murderer, liar, sorcerer, thief will enter into the holy city, but will be cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone. So it is my belief that all men will be given a chance to know Christ but if they CONTINUE to reject his ways, then there is no more sacrifice for sins(in the bible) and so the penalty of death is the result of sin. the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is life, one must accept a gift!. Take a look at what Peter says, he says that spots they are without blemish, where they will dwell in the midst of darkness forever. This is just one of many scriptures that tell us the fate of the wicked.

If you say the cross, means that there is no punishment and the murderer can keep on murdering for eternity, because the cross, paid for the murderers salvation, then you are making the cross a license to sin and sounding more like a new ageist.

If you say the cross, will burn out all sin from all men, then you are now FORCING ALL PEOPLE to be changed, whether they like it or not, this goes against Christs teachings of choice and free will. Will a hardcore Satanist accept Christ as saviour, will someone like Hitler, this is presumptious teaching.

Paul Hazelwood

Will a hardcore Satanist accept Christ as saviour, will someone like Hitler, this is presumptious teaching.

Not really,

1 Timothy 2:4 concerning Gods determination to save all men and bring them to the knowledge of truth keeps that idea from being presumptuous and in no way violates anyones free will in the first place.

Freewill is a hot topic.You may want to seek a moderators council before proceeding.

Thanks David for pointing that out. Yes, detailed, ongoing discussions of "freewill" vs. all sovereign is a disallowed topic on the boards.

Hopefully it would suffice for all "sides" of the discussion to say that God is completely capable of creating the conditions to bring us to the place of changing our will to conform to His, if and when He so chooses...thus the "secrets" and details of His PLAN for the Ages.

1.) Attack the most revered translation of the Bible, the King James Version, stating it is full of mistranslations regarding the following words: "hell," for ever," and "eternal." These words must be discounted to prove this doctrine. While it is true that the English word "hell" in the 1611 KJV Bible had a different meaning than what our English word means today since it was less specific making it more difficult to determine whether "hell" is coming from the Greek word, "Hades" (the unseen world of the dead) or the Greek word, "Gehenna" (the place of everlasting fire) in the New Testament. In spite of this difficulty, the Bible is clear in Revelation 20:11-15 that the temporary hell "Hades" will give up its dead to the everlasting hell "Gehenna." Later in this article I will deal with this in detail.

Despite the numerous things I could point out in the above statement, fact remains that there is actually no need whatsoever to attack the KJV version of the bible in order to understand what God has determined for mankind, which is to save them all.

Quote

2.) Disregard the words of Jesus Himself, as He speaks numerous times about an eternal hell in the New Testament.

A person can disagree that the context of Gods corrective punishment is the context in which Jesus words should be interpreted, but it is a plain false accusation to say that Christian Universalists disregaurd the words of Jesus.

Quote

3.) Throw out all the rules of Bible interpretation based on the "law of first mention." All cults claim to have new revelation outside of the Bible's clear teachings and fail to build on the foundational truths of the Bible. They also take verses out of context and discount verses that have previously mentioned a truth prior to the verse in question (the law of first mention). In this case, if the Bible has already clearly defined an eternal hell in one place, it may not mention it in later places. Proper Biblical interpretation would refer to where this subject was first mentioned, in order to build upon that previously mentioned truth. This applies to all subjects in the Bible.

This is an view of men and a person simply has to call this for what it is, a dogmatic assertion. The clarity the writer speaks of is a presupposed bias. This is an example of men who agree on a certain way to intepret the bible without actually having one scripture to back up and demonstrate their agreed upon methods are correct.

I personally understand this issue, context is a matter of ambiguity. I have faith that Gods corrective nature is the character by which we shoudl view every last word in the bible.

The dogmatic nature of this assumes and asserts that their agreed upon method of interpretation is absolutely beyond reproach and ordained by God himself.

These assertions have no true way to be proved or disproved thereby showing that they simply have a faith that theirs is right rather than biblical fact.

Quote

4.) Refuse the counsel and instruction of the five-fold ministry. They do not submit to true church leadership, as those in TURA emphatically claim their revelation is greater than the foundational doctrines established throughout church history. They are caught up in a "wind of doctrine" because they have not yielded to proper discipleship.

Dogmatic assertion, read #3.

Where religion and eternal torment are concern this is an exploitation of better safe than sorry, proving that there is no true biblical merit for what they propose.

The chapter earlier speaks about making all things new, and every tear wiped away, and an end to death. But this verse speaks about people outside the kingdom being in the lake of fire and brimstone, and the second death.

Im a little bit confused. Is this verse referring to the firstfruits?

Im kind of wondering if Revelation is a book giving a roadmap of the end times. Let alone in order.

It is confusing, but that's one reason why I believe that people who continue to sin, even during the time of new heavenly jerusalem, that they would be thrown into the lake of fire, that Gods laws/standards doesn't change even during this time.

I just did some research, and it appears in Revelation 21 where it refers to the Lake of fire and all this pleasurable stuff in the kingdom, I'll explain it best.

The bible already explained how death and hades were cast into the lake of fire. Spiritual death, and hadean death being killed. In math, two negatives equal a positive (5)-(-6)=11. In harry potter, the enemies are referred to deatheaters, which seek to create immortality. The whole idea of no tears, pain and sorrow seem symbolic for having your spiritual death killed, to bring spiritual life. Kind of like how a strep throat pathogen has to be killed to save someones life. In another example, if you were in constant pain for a bad hip, you finally get surgery. You are probably happy to have the hip replaced, but the surgery and the recovery is going to be rough. It applies to the old phrase "Things have to get worse before they get better"